Unable to submit update for F22 (was Re: bodhi 2 now live)

[Parag Nemade]

Hi,

On Sun, Aug 23, 2015 at 11:03 AM, Ralf Corsepius <rc040203 at freenet.de> wrote:
> On 08/21/2015 06:02 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 21 Aug 2015 05:27:37 +0200
>> Ralf Corsepius <rc040203 at freenet.de> wrote:
>>
>>> Upstreams, yes, but not Fedora. Fedora should be self-hosted.
>>
>>
>> Can you please define "Fedora" and "self-hosted" as you use them above?
>
>
> A domain 100& operated and owned by Fedora (rsp. RH) and covered by the
> Fedora CLA. Whether github is popular does not matter all. It's third party
> out of Fedora's control.
>
> What you are doing, means pushing Fedora users around, in what I consider
> very rude ways.
>
>> Fedora is part of the larger open source comunity.
>> Fedora Infrastructure uses 100% open source software.
>
> All irrelevant.
>
> Bohdi is just a tool used by Fedora, like any other arbitrary tool.
>
> I.e. I am not interested in getting involved in bodhi, I am just using the
> bodhi instance Fedora has deployed and I am expecting to have a way to
> contact the Fedora personnel to report bugs.
>
>
>> Anyhow, for the last time:
>>
>> github is currently the perferred way to report bodhi2 bugs.
>
>
> And for illiterate: github a legitimate way for upstream, but is not a way,
> which is acceptable to Fedora users.
> You guys, need to learn to distinguish your roles as upstream and as
> maintainers of an installation - These are *not* identical.
>
>> If you have some objection to them, you can file a fedorahosted ticket
>> or infrastructure fedorahosted ticket. Also, I have been trying to file
>> tickets on issues I see in mailing lists that aren't filed.
>
>
> I am close to filing a ticket to FESCO and/or the Board/Council, to request
> to revert to bodhi one - bodhi2 has proven to suffer from very ugly bugs and
> to be close to being unusable.

I am sure moving to bodhi2 will have definitely some advantages that
is why this move happened but I also don't see any usage document for
bodhi2 before/when it went live. Also bodhi is really important
service for Fedora so when its deployed on staging server for testing,
testers should have been called at least to comment on any
functionality/UI related problem.

I have also seen developers have worked to fix/triage almost all the
filed issues against bodhi2. If there are any major issues in bodhi2
then let's provide as much as input to them and they will try to
quickly fix them. But as move has already happen let's use bodhi2 and
not to go back.

Regards,
Parag